Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1942/39433
Title: Conservative versus surgical treatment of foot drop in peroneal nerve entrapment: rationale and design of a prospective, multi-centre, randomized parallel-group controlled trial
Authors: Oosterbos, Christophe
Rummens, Sofie
BOGAERTS, Kris 
Hoornaert, Sophie
WEYNS, Frank 
Dubuisson, Annie
Lemmens , Robin
Theys , Tom
Issue Date: 2022
Publisher: BMC
Source: Trials, 23 (1) (Art N° 1065)
Abstract: Background: High-quality evidence is lacking to support one treatment strategy over another in patients with foot drop due to peroneal nerve entrapment. This leads to strong variation in daily practice. Methods/design: The FOOTDROP (Follow-up and Outcome of Operative Treatment with Decompressive Release Of The Peroneal nerve) trial is a randomized, multi-centre study in which patients with peroneal nerve entrapment and persistent foot drop, despite initial conservative treatment, will be randomized 10 (& PLUSMN; 4) weeks after onset between non-invasive treatment and surgical decompression. The primary endpoint is the difference in distance covered during the 6-min walk test between randomization and 9 months later. Time to recovery is the key secondary endpoint. Other secondary outcome measures encompass ankle dorsiflexion strength (MRC score and isometric dynamometry), gait assessment (10-m walk test, functional ambulation categories, Stanmore questionnaire), patient-reported outcome measures (EQ5D-5L), surgical complications, neurological deficits (sensory changes, motor scores for ankle eversion and hallux extension), health economic assessment (WPAI) and electrodiagnostic assessment. Discussion: The results of this randomized trial may elucidate the role of surgical decompression of the peroneal nerve and aid in clinical decision-making.
Notes: Oosterbos, C (corresponding author), Univ Hosp Leuven, Dept Neurosurg, Leuven, Belgium.
christopheoosterbos@gmail.com
Keywords: Randomized controlled trial;Foot drop;Peroneal nerve;Neurolysis;Conservative treatment;Protocol design
Document URI: http://hdl.handle.net/1942/39433
e-ISSN: 1745-6215
DOI: 10.1186/s13063-022-07009-x
ISI #: 000905950700003
Rights: The Author(s) 2022. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativeco mmons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
Category: A1
Type: Journal Contribution
Appears in Collections:Research publications

Show full item record

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

1
checked on Apr 22, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.